- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:54:35 +1300
- To: "'Linked JSON'" <public-linked-json@w3.org>
It is great to see you taking the initiative on this Gregg! On 30 Sep 2016 at 11:31, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > JSON-LD 1.0 and JSON-LD API 1.0 have been out and successful for many years now. > JSON-LD has succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of the CG, thanks to broad adoption. Indeed! > Additionally, the Framing algorithm [2] has proven to be important, but work on the > specification was never complete, and implementations have moved beyond what was > documented in any case. It is certainly handy but I'm not sure there's agreement on what exactly it should be. Initially it was just (or at least mostly) about re-framing an existing graph... I think what a lot of people (myself included) actually want and need is to query a graph and control the serialization of the result. Maybe we should start with a discussion on the role of framing!? > I think it’s time to get back to these documents to create a future 1.1 Community Group > release of the specifications; 1.1 sounds like minor tweaks to the existing official W3C specifications but some of the discussions and proposals I just saw go way beyond that. What do you consider to be in scope for 1.1? > At this point, I’d be happy to see active engagement on the mailing list to move these issues > forward; I’m prepared to do the heavy lifting on the specification documents, and to > maintain tests and my own Ruby implementation to match. Hopefully, other implementors > and heavy users can actively engage in making this happen (perhaps an hour a week). It may > be that we’ll want to start up the bi-weekly calls we used to discuss and resolve on these > issues prior to moving into the RDF WG. I'd definitely like to help with this but unfortunately my spare cycles are quite limited. Cheers, Markus -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 10 October 2016 08:55:53 UTC